[POLL] Calgary Flames coaching change mega-thread—with poll

[DeluxeMoustache]

The whole idea of hiring a coach with respect to whom you would have to explain why he is good despite poor results does not make sense to me.

I am truly surprised that there are 8 smartest guys in the room in CP at this point in the voting. I would love to hear if there exists a well articulated detailed case in favour of Peters, and based on what set of criteria other than hope, you would favourably compare him to the other candidates. Honestly.

I mean heck, even if you say something like that he has great underlying stats, you still are explaining why he did some right things but couldn’t win. We just saw the same thing here.

There is an element of hope with any new coach, but at least someone who has some success at the NHL level reduces the risk factor. You know they can motivate a team of highly paid athletes at the top level to win.

I also can’t believe that I wouldn’t put it past Treliving though.

[Red]

Originally Posted by smiggy77

Thoughts on player usage with Vigneault? A lot of our concerns with GG were the odd player usage and favoring veterans, which a lot of people mentioned occurred in Van and even NYR:

https://www.defendingbigd.com/2018/4...-hitchcock-nhl



Although his record speaks for itself. I'm curious on the public opinion as I've read about it back when he was in Van but not really much in NY.

To me it doesn't matter if Stajan stays and plays 20 a night as long as they keep on winning. Because winning record is a proof of proper personnel deployment . To a degree of course .

[_Q_]

Why the F would Treliving think that Peters is an upgrade on GG? If this is true, this team is truly in a sad state.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Why the F would Treliving think that Peters is an upgrade on GG? If this is true, this team is truly in a sad state.

I am seriously posing that question to the 8 voters.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Sutter's last few seasons were rumoured to be Stevens running the X and Os with Sutter managing the bench in games and the temperament, which I think makes sense.

My first choice would land with Peters as the head coach and Sutter as an associate building a combination that would give the team the modern systems to compete, but with a leadership voice on the bench to backfill the obvious issues with the guys wearing skates.

Unlikely, but that would be my perfect landing spot.

How about flipping that?

[Timbo]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Why the F would Treliving think that Peters is an upgrade on GG? If this is true, this team is truly in a sad state.

I think the worry is that Treliving seems to have a pattern of surrounding himself with people he is more familiar with. If I’m not mistaken Peters and him have a connection.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Why the F would Treliving think that Peters is an upgrade on GG? If this is true, this team is truly in a sad state.

There's gotta be something we're not seeing if he truly does have 2 teams interested despite not even being on the market yet. I'm not sure what it could be, everything I've read is sure underwhelming, but he sure seems to be in demand for a guy that supposedly sucks

[Locke]

Bill Peters....

So we're doing the 'smartest guy in the room' thing again?

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Svartsengi

Carolina's power play was 18.4% and the penalty kill was 77.4%. I wouldn't be eager to hire Bill Peters based on that. Hurricanes pp was only slightly better than Flames and penalty kill was worse. The Rangers pp was over 21% and penalty kill over 81%. I would rather have Alain Vigneault come here. Don't know if Alain is the right guy but whoever Treliving hires better be known for having a history of good special teams.

The powerplay is a concern. If we bring in Peters we need to make damn sure that we bring in an assistant who has a proven history of running a successful PP.

The PK is actually a strength of his though - it's why he was added to that 2016 World Cup of Hockey staff.

Over his 4 seasons in Carolina they were in the top 5-6 PK in the league in each of his first 3 seasons there, and then only last year had a bad PK (but also the 3rd worst short handed save percentage in the league).

If you look at his 4 seasons as a whole in Carolina they rank 5th on the PK at 82.7%. Behind only Anaheim, Boston, St.Louis, and L.A.

The biggest concern for me with Peters is generating offense - they are the 4th worst in GF in the league in his time there. Unsure if that's because they lack offensive talent or if his system just doesn't really help forwards generate offense.

[JTech780]

If AV is the next coach, we probably won't see much of Andersson or Mangiapane next year. AV is the coach you bring in if you have veteran team that needs to get to the next level, not if you have a young team trying to figure out who they are.

Sutter has a great pedigree and might make some sense, but one characteristic of Sutter's teams is that they can't score, and that has been one our biggest down falls the last 2 years, so not sure I see a fit there.

Peters is my choice. His team's play fast. He is more of a demanding coach than Gulutzan is, which is something this team needs, but he also lets his young players play and puts them in positions to succeeded.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I was trying to research more about Bill Peters. This article came up and at least provides some insight into the type of guy he is and how he approaches the game

https://thecoachessite.com/2018/01/0...k-pull-choose/

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

doesn't it usually work that the leadership/motivating guy is the head coach with the x and O guy the associate/assistant?
I don't see how it would work with the main leadership and motivational component being the assistant. seems it would undercut the head coach.

For sure.

The only way it would work would be if a) Peters didn't feel threatened and b) Sutter wanted to get back into it, but was happy not to be the man in order to stay close to home

Removing the names, I think the model is important. They can't go hard ass with no technical skills and they can't go poindexter either.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Gauging a fanbase's reaction to coaching decisions is not a great way to evaluate a coach. I have heard the same complaints about player-usage applied to practically every coach in the League.

I was about to say this - I've heard complaints about not playing the young guys about almost every coach, including Babcock, Vignault, Maclellan, Hartley, etc.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

You are basically arguing that Sutter is a bad coach because his teams succeeded despite your expectations. That is rather nonsensical to me. In his last eight seasons as a coach, Sutter's teams won a division title, reached the final three times and won the Cup twice. If you're looking for an experienced coach with a pedigree, there's almost nobody better available.

No I'm not "basically" arguing that.

I'm saying that IMO AV is an overall better coach than Sutter and I would pick him first.

The other thing I'm arguing is that the more points your team has the more likely you are to actually win the Stanley Cup, but that's not really as much of an argument as it is just a plain fact.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Mark

I have no doubt that that is a significant reason, but I'm wondering out loud how much the nostalgia is adding to it and possibly blinding over the fact he may not be a current fit.

Yeah nostalgia plays a role I'm sure. For me, it's certainly in there somewhere. But there is no more accomplished coach available.

And unlike other former coaches, I don't feel like he wore out his welcome. He only coached two full seasons with the team. A beauty playoff run and a division win, that ended with a pathetic game 7 showing in the first round. Take away that game 7, and he simply had nothing but success coaching this franchise.

Darryl with the right assistants makes a ton of sense to me.

[dino7c]

Peters isn't my first choice but to hate on him is stupid...should he be hired I will at least give the guy a shot.

[DeluxeMoustache]

I will ask voters in favour of Peters to pretty please explain the position

If you do, I would gladly promise not to debate it.

Just honestly, swear to god, don’t understand it and want to understand the rationale.

[Timbo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I will ask voters in favour of Peters to pretty please explain the position

If you do, I would gladly promise not to debate it.

Just honestly, swear to god, don’t understand it and want to understand the rationale.

There are some rationalizations on the Who do you want as head coach thread.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by btimbit

There's gotta be something we're not seeing if he truly does have 2 teams interested despite not even being on the market yet. I'm not sure what it could be, everything I've read is sure underwhelming, but he sure seems to be in demand for a guy that supposedly sucks

Peters has been a guy held in high regard for many years...long before he ever got the Canes job. He was Babcocks right hand guy in Detroit, and they had great success.

Also his Hockey Canada experience that many in the business consider a big plus as those guys generally have success where ever they go.

That doesn't guarantee success, but nothing does.

[EldrickOnIce]

The more I read about Peters, the more I like